Friday, June 4, 2010

Hammon Park

Comment Up
Another scheme to grab the cash

This country is $13 trillion in debt but the government continues with all these grants and give-aways. This particular one involves Hammon Park. Tim Hernandez came before the Planning & Zoning Board Wednesday night to ensure that he got to use the "dough re me." All his permits, etc. were in order. The P&Z was going to hear his proposal for a Plan Amendment.

Hammon Park wants to build/add 33 more residential units to the eleven already built. Out of those eleven residential units, eight are in foreclosure with the remaining three not meeting the assessments. It is rumored that this project is in trouble.

In 2008, New Urban/RFC Lake Worth LLC (Hammon Park) wanted an up-zone from 30 units to an acre to 38 units per acre. Even the CRA committed to giving them $100,000. In May of that year, they got a Grant for affordable housing. Last year, they sold off some of their property south of 3rd Avenue North to Publix. They made a small fortune. Publix now says they paid too much for the property--$3.4 million in December 2009. Hammon Park now has closed on the Grant to be used for the portion of their project that is north of 3rd Avenue North.

They came before the Planning & Zoning Board on Wednesday night to approve the building of more townhouses for affordable housing--like we don't have enough empties sitting around and most everything within the City of Lake Worth IS affordable as Peter Timm always says. Just look at the taxable values!

Because they no longer own the land where the proposed pool area was to be built and what kept the ratio of impervious surface in balance (basically now it is 81.368 impervious surface) it was determined that there was not enough green space for residents and that children would basically have to play in the streets.

It is somewhat unclear as to what the motions were but this is what I believe occurred. The first motion by the P&Z was to not approve the Plans based on the lack of green space and the high ratio of impervious surface. Rick Castor, with New Urban, was sitting in the last row of the Chamber next to Rene Varela. He jumped up and said "You can't do that; we already have the approval." Chair Paxman then said to the rest of the P&Z, "No, we can only make a recommendation to the Commission." There was another motion to have New Urban come back with a revised Plan. The vote was 5 to 2 with Spinelli and Paxman dissenting. They thought the project should go forward as is.

The City Commission will be the final authority as to whether this developer is allowed to amend his Plan and proceed.

P&Z member Robert Waples said, "We, (Lake Worth) for 25 plus years, have done things wrong and I feel that it's this Board's (P&Z) responsibility to start getting it right."

2 comments:

kkss21 said...

Paxman and Spinelli-two leftover pigs from the corrupt days of the Wes Blackman "Developers Helping Developers" club. Remember the good old days when board members like Spinelli could use their positions to get sweetheart land deals ? Remember when illegal variances and non existent setbacks were constantly given out to the Developers that descended on Lake Worth like vultures on a carcass? Hammon Park IN NO WAY benefits the taxpayers of Lake Worth. They are a blight. SHAME ON ANYONE helping these failed speculators steal more tax dollars.

Lynn Anderson said...

e-mail recv'd from P&Z member--

Technically…

There are 13 existing units in two buildings of 6 and 7 units. 11 have been sold, NUC still owns 2.

Density was increased from 29 du/ac (2004 Plan A) to 34 du/ac (2008 Plan B CWHIP) to 37.8 du/ac (Plan C North Parcel)

The final motion, as I understood it, was to recommend that the Commission deny the request to amend the RPD based on the lack of green space/high ISR. The audio file has not been uploaded to the City website, so I can’t review it.

Because we actually did not deny their request to amend the RPD—we don’t have the authority to do that—the chair said they can bring it back to the P&ZB without having to wait the six months that would be required if we actually denied their application. They also can take it directly to the Commission, as is, if they want.